VoteNo and Tallgrass

[warriorpride]

driven said:

warriorpride said:

If anyone wants promises about the ES, MS and HS that your kids will go to from now until they graduate HS, they are not going to get it. The boundaries have changed a number of times around here over the last 10+ years. The boundaries are changed based on where the houses & the kids are located. The SB can guess at how things will look down the road, but the farther you get out into the future, the harder is is to be confident of your predictions.

Clearly the SB does not take boundary changes lightly, as that might be the most emotionally-charged topic that they need to handle, nor would they plan on changing the boundaries every year or two. But, in 5 or 6 years, as the new housing builds out, if the population concentration dictates, boundary changes are always a possibility. The boundaries can't come close to being considered "final" until the housing in the district is fully developed.

We've seen several people post on this board about how they went through boundary changes and their kids adapted without any problems.

Does anyone really think that a boundary change will be a life-changing event for them or their kids?

No one thinks their children are not adaptable. Of course they are.

We were afraid of the portables at Scullen and yet here they are. My child is still having a great experience at Scullen and actually loves the few minutes of fresh air on the way to the modular.

We will adapt to whatever we need to adapt to. We are just unwilling to constantly have our concerns ignored. Believe it or not, the Fry community have more concerns other than boundaries.

My family has lived in 204 for 9 yrs and we have also watched the many changes. That is not the problem. The reason the boundaries are mentioned at all is because it explains why the Fry community is reviewing this referendum with a fine tooth comb. No one likes to be duped twice.

Can you please expand on the part I bolded? I seriously would be interested in what this is.

[soxfan]

warriorpride said:

momthreekids said:

Our concerns to the SB have not been addressed and there is a lot of mistrust of the board after the boundary meetings. Glawe protected WE they can walk to the new school. Why did he pass over option 5b? It would be harder to move Springbrook to WV. Fry will be an easy target to move and then Peterson can get its growth.

Am I correctly interpretting this consiracy theory: The SB has defined the 3HS boundaries. Then, they'll pull a switcheroo on Fry if the Peterson area doesn't build out so that the Peterson area will be more appealing top buyers, thus allowing the SB to achieve the enrollment numbers that they are predicting?

It's unfortunate these theories are out there. But they are. The school board only makes things worse by declining offers to come speak here. The distrust level is sky high and climbing. Call it crazy but because we were so duped, people can't trust the boundaries won't change yet again.

I still remember the passion JC had for option 6. I don't blame her as she really believed it was good for the district. It's hard for me at least to believe she could reconcile that passion and move on.

[gumby]

soxfan said:

gumby said:

It very well may be true what everyone is saying. I was just left with a very negative impression after the boundary meetings and did not get the feel that TG would come around. Also, maybe it was the whole Ross thing from the VoteNO board that is shaping my impression. He was incredibly negative it seems as to TG's position.

Gumby,

You have to admit he was pretty darn funny though. I almost died when I saw his funny boundary proposal. It was the only laugh I had during the boundary process.

Where is dear Ross? Maybe he drank himself under with all that boxed wine.

May he rest in peace.

lol. Yes, I supose he was. He and letsgetcreative. I was only lurking back then, but there were some hilarious moments.

[soxfan]

fence said:

momthreekids said:

As a TG resident I am very upset with the SB refusing to meet with our HOA. I believe WE HOA got a meeting? Please correct me if I am wrong.

The PTA meetings are very pro yes and when no questions come up it becomes very uncomfortable. Lots of negative comments from the crowd and the board.

Why it the SB not listening to us?? They became very uncomfortable when the Scullen question came up. I am more concerned about loosing Scullen then NV. They ignored our bridge and option 5b.

At this point I rather vote no and go to WV with WE and Wheatland.

Doesn't anyone think that its possible the SB is just not interested in accepting an invitation to a CFO meeting? Can you imagine? It would only serve to further the chaos. There is nothing to be gained.

The SB has already or is scheduled to meet at every school in this district. If the TG homeowners association is interested in talking directly with the SB, why can't they arrange their own meeting with the SB directly? Just as WE did? WE did not call a meeting with CFO and then ask the SB to attend it.

If I were a member of the SB, I would not desire to attend a meeting with TG homeowners during a scheduled meeting with CFO. You might as well call it a lynching. In my opinion this is not a fair expectation and doesn't mean that the SB is not interested in talking to the people of TG. It just means that the particular forum TG invited them to is destined to be an unproductive argument.

Fence,

They were not invited to attend the same meeting although it would have been pretty thrilling.

They were invited to come by themselves as the HOA didn't want a debate type format.

[soxfan]

Quote: "Boundries can be changed at anytime by the Board. I would assume
that the boundries change at least once more maybe twice before the
new High School opens since there are 2 school board elections prior
to the new school being completed." end quote


Just took this off another board (not this one)

It's out there.

Not saying I agree but, it's possible.

[admin]

HS opens in 08 SB election is 09

BTW WHAT OTHER BOARD Are you cheating on us??!! ;D


The HS boundaries won't change but some ES will change. When Builta gets to crowded expect Timberridge to be move to Patterson.

[soxfan]

admin said:

HS opens in 08 SB election is 09

BTW WHAT OTHER BOARD Are you cheating on us??!! ;D

LOL

If I told you, I'd be killed for being a traitor. It's rather exclusive at this point.

[soxfan]

soxfan said:

admin said:

HS opens in 08 SB election is 09

BTW WHAT OTHER BOARD Are you cheating on us??!! ;D

LOL

If I told you, I'd be killed for being a traitor. It's rather exclusive at this point.

but trust me.. it's not as fun as this one is... at least not yet...

[momthreekids]

I did hear they were talking about the HS opening in 08 from the Crone meeting, but Metzger did not want to go there at the Scullen meeting.

What do they know about the condemnation hearing that they are not telling us??? They seem very confident it is going to move quickly. Wish I could be as confident.

[admin]

Even if, let's say, a certain area could run three candidates and win, they still need one more vote from the JC BG CV JS.

Maybe that is why VoteNO is meeting with TG? Cutting a deal with CV? {just kidding}

It would be really tough to run a three person slate from one area and sweep.

[fence]

soxfan said:

fence said:

Doesn't anyone think that its possible the SB is just not interested in accepting an invitation to a CFO meeting? Can you imagine? It would only serve to further the chaos. There is nothing to be gained.

The SB has already or is scheduled to meet at every school in this district. If the TG homeowners association is interested in talking directly with the SB, why can't they arrange their own meeting with the SB directly? Just as WE did? WE did not call a meeting with CFO and then ask the SB to attend it.

If I were a member of the SB, I would not desire to attend a meeting with TG homeowners during a scheduled meeting with CFO. You might as well call it a lynching. In my opinion this is not a fair expectation and doesn't mean that the SB is not interested in talking to the people of TG. It just means that the particular forum TG invited them to is destined to be an unproductive argument.

Fence,

They were not invited to attend the same meeting although it would have been pretty thrilling.

They were invited to come by themselves as the HOA didn't want a debate type format.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood because the thread was about a voteno and TG meeting, and there was an initial post about the SB declining the invitation. I was wondering why anyone would expect the SB to attend!

Yes, that would have been thrilling - more like a Cicero mayoral debate!

Anyway, I guess if I were a TG resident, I'd send a message into the SB personally asking why they couldn't meet. Or maybe since very few people attend the coffee meetings, the SB would convert one of them to a TG HOA coffee meeting?

Clearly they're busy but there are ways to get what you want to happen. With the # of HOAs we have here, I don't imagine they'd have time to get to everyone, but I do agree that TG is one of the more important ones to attend.

Anyway, re. TG not attending Scullen, or having TG moved to WV ITRP, those are just crazy thoughts someone put out there to drive you all nuts. In the original HS boundary scenarios, TG was put in a few different places, but there was not one MS boundary proposal with Fry going anywhere but Scullen. And sending Fry to WV isn't going to happen ITRP. There is no room at WV in that scenario for Fry to go anywhere but the new HS. That's all baseless propoganda IMHO.

I know that TG is po-d that they don't get to stay at NV, and they feel that since they supported the referendum before that they should have been given more "respect" in the boundary process (read, get to stay at NV). I understand how people could be irritated, but all the BS rumor-mongering is making it all worse. Its just silly.

We can all stand together as brothers or go down together as fools as the famous MLK once said.

[admin]

We can all stand together as brothers or go down together as fools as the famous MLK once said.

And I am standing next to Fence because if I need a word-smith to get me out of trouble I want her.

[driven]

fence said:

soxfan said:

Fence,

They were not invited to attend the same meeting although it would have been pretty thrilling.

They were invited to come by themselves as the HOA didn't want a debate type format.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood because the thread was about a voteno and TG meeting, and there was an initial post about the SB declining the invitation. I was wondering why anyone would expect the SB to attend!

Yes, that would have been thrilling - more like a Cicero mayoral debate!

Anyway, I guess if I were a TG resident, I'd send a message into the SB personally asking why they couldn't meet. Or maybe since very few people attend the coffee meetings, the SB would convert one of them to a TG HOA coffee meeting?

Clearly they're busy but there are ways to get what you want to happen. With the # of HOAs we have here, I don't imagine they'd have time to get to everyone, but I do agree that TG is one of the more important ones to attend.

Anyway, re. TG not attending Scullen, or having TG moved to WV ITRP, those are just crazy thoughts someone put out there to drive you all nuts. In the original HS boundary scenarios, TG was put in a few different places, but there was not one MS boundary proposal with Fry going anywhere but Scullen. And sending Fry to WV isn't going to happen ITRP. There is no room at WV in that scenario for Fry to go anywhere but the new HS. That's all baseless propoganda IMHO.

I know that TG is po-d that they don't get to stay at NV, and they feel that since they supported the referendum before that they should have been given more "respect" in the boundary process (read, get to stay at NV). I understand how people could be irritated, but all the BS rumor-mongering is making it all worse. Its just silly.
We can all stand together as brothers or go down together as fools as the famous MLK once said.

I do understand your perspective. Unfortunately, the rumor mongering is what tipped us off to the original boundary changes. Sadly, those rumor proved true.

[momthreekids]

At the boundary meeting at the NV gold campus the SB told some Fry people we may loose Scullen. It is not a rumor. I am not against attending the new HS, but am against loosing Scullen.

I wrote before they seemed unprepared for this question at the Scullen meeting, which causes doubt.

The SB caused a lot of mistrust in our community. Wish I could feel they are trustworthy, but I saw JC compassion and her pit in her stomach and it left one in mine too.

[driven]

momthreekids said:

At the boundary meeting at the NV gold campus the SB told some Fry people we may loose Scullen. It is not a rumor. I am not against attending the new HS, but am against loosing Scullen.

I wrote before they seemed unprepared for this question at the Scullen meeting, which causes doubt.

The SB caused a lot of mistrust in our community. Wish I could feel they are trustworthy, but I saw JC compassion and her pit in her stomach and it left one in mine too.

I second that and agree on all counts!

From the SB member's lips to my ear.